Review Procedure of Scientific Articles Submitted for Publication in "Studia Maritima".
1. The journal's editorial board conducts an initial evaluation of the submitted texts regarding their compatibility with the journal's profile and basic requirements concerning scientific methodology and substantive level. Articles that do not meet the basic publication conditions are rejected.
2. At least two independent reviewers from outside the academic unit affiliated by the author of the publication are appointed to assess each preliminarily qualified article.
3. The author(s) and reviewers do not know each other's identities (the so-called double-blind review process).
4. If the reviewer knows the identity of the author of the reviewed work, they must sign a declaration of no conflict of interest, meaning no:
a. Direct personal relationships (up to the second degree of kinship, marital relationship, legal relationships, conflict),
b. Professional subordination relationships,
c. Direct scientific cooperation during the two years preceding the year of review preparation.
5. The review takes the form of a written document and concludes with a clear decision regarding the acceptance of the article for publication, conditional acceptance for publication after addressing identified flaws, or rejection.
6. In the case of one negative review, a third reviewer is appointed. The final decision on the acceptance or rejection of the article is made by the editor-in-chief.
7. The review template is available on the journal's website [download the review form].
8. The names of reviewers for individual articles are not disclosed. The list of reviewers collaborating with the "Studia Maritima" journal is published annually on the journal's website.
9. Upon receiving the reviews, the authors are obliged to make corrections to the article taking into account the reviewer's comments.
10. Before publication, the article undergoes verification by a language editor and a publishing editor.
Contribution to editorial decisions: Peer reviews assist the editor in making editorial decisions and may also help authors to improve their manuscript. Should the reviewer have critical remarks concerning the manuscript, they are to assess whether in spite of these the manuscript can be accepted for publication. If it is so, the reviewer should also formulate suggestions of improvements and/or additions to be made. The reviewer in such case can demand another insight in the corrected manuscript or – in case of remarks of lesser factual significance – leave the decision to the editorial board.
Competence and promptness: Any selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its timely review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself/herself from the review process.
Confidentiality: The whole manuscript received for review must be treated as confidential document and shall not be used for personal profit. The manuscript must not be shown to or discussed with others except those authorized by the editor.
Acknowledgement of sources: Reviewers should identify the relevant published work that has not been cited by authors. Any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper should be reported to the editor.
Standards of objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively and expressed clearly by means of appropriate arguments. The reviewed academic articles are confidential and reviewed anonymously (double-blind review process). Generally the reviewers and the author(s) have to be affiliated with different academic institutions. If, however, the reviewer knows the identity of the author and believes that there is a conflict of interests, they should notify the editorial board about this fact. The reviewers are obliged to disclose potential conflict of interests, pertinent in particular to:
For this purpose the reviewers are requested to fill in and sign the Reviewer’s declaration available on the website of the journal STUDIA MARITIMA in the menu option “Reviewing procedure”
Transparency of the reviewing procedure: The current list of reviewers is published in each issue and on the Journal’s website but the surnames of reviewers of a particular article are not revealed. Rules of assessing articles and a reviewing form are made public on the Journal’s website in the section “Reviewing procedure”. Reviews are in written form and are basis for accepting or rejecting an article. If there is a controversy, the final decision is made by the thematic editors together with the Academic Advisory Council of STUDIA MARTIMA.
Reviewers of Volume 36/2023
1. Prof. dr Andriela Vitic-Cetkovic, University of Montenegro
2. Prof. Andrzej Biłozor, Uniwersytet Warmińsko-Mazurski
3. Prof. Barbara Kos, Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny w Katowicach
4. Dr Bob Pierik, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
5. Ass. Prof. Dr Carsten Jahnke, University of Copenhagen
6. Prof. Domenico Scalera, Università del Sannio, Italy
7. Prof. Dr. Gregor Rohmann, Universität Rostock
8. Dr Jordan Siemianowski, Uniwersytet Szczeciński
9. Dr Guido Rossi, University of Edinburgh
10. Dr Iwona Windekilde, Norwegian University of Science and Technology
11. Dr Janel Fontaine, University of Glasgow
12. Prof. dr Julian Vasilev, University of Economics Varna
13. Prof. Justyna Chodkowska-Miszczuk, Uniwersytet Mikołaja Kopernika w Toruniu
14. Prof. Leif Runefelt Royal Swedish Academy of Letters, History and Antiquities
15. Ass. Prof. Dr. Lejla Lazović-Pita, University of Sarajevo
16. Prof. dr hab. Marian Cristescu, Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Romania
17. Prof. dr hab. Norbert Kasparek, Uniwersytet Warmińsko-Mazurski
18. Prof. dr Oliver Auge, Kiel University; Germany
19. Prof. Patrick Voughan, Uniwersytet Jagielloński
20. Prof. Paul Douglas Lockhart, Wright State University, Dayton, OH USA
21. Prof. dr Phillip Hellwege M. Jur., University of Augsburg
22. Prof. Piotr Gryszel, Uniwersytet Ekonomiczny we Wrocławiu
23. Prof. Piotr Olender, Akademia Nauk Stosowanych w Raciborzu
24. Ass. Prof. Dr. Plamen Ralchev, University of National and World Economy, Sofia
25. Chief Assist. Prof. Radka Nacheva, University of Economics – Varna
26. Prof. dr hab. Radosław Gaziński, Uniwersytet Szczeciński
27. Prof. Robert Frost, University of Aberdeen
28. Prof. Robert Skobelski, Uniwersytet Zielonogórski
29. Prof. Robin Pearson, Hull University Business School, UK
30. Prof. Sławomir Pytel, Uniwersytet Śląski
31. Dr Taylor West, Saint Louis University, Madrid
32. Teele Saar, Estonian Maritime Museum/ University of Tartu
33. Ass. Prof. Dr. Visnja Samardzija, Institute for Development and International Relations – IRMO, Zagreb
34. Prof. dr hab. Wojciech Strzyżewski, Uniwersytet Zielonogórski
Reviewers of Volume 35/2022
1. Prof. Dariusz Adamczyk, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz Universität Hannover
2. Dr Sylwia Bykowska, Instytut Historii PAN. Pracownia Historii Gdańska i Dziejów Morskich Polski
3. Dr Edward J. Erickson, Professor of Military History, U.S. Marine Corps University, Quantico, Va., USA
4. Prof. dr hab. Bolesław Hajduk, Instytut Polsko-Skandynawski
5. Dr Monika Heinemann, Leibniz-Institute for Jewish History and Culture – Simon Dubnow
6. Prof. Mark D. Karau, University of Wisconsin, USA
7. Prof. dr hab. Norbert Kasparek, Uniwersytet Warmińsko-Mazurski
8. Prof. dr hab. Krzysztof Komorowski, Wojskowa Akademia Techniczna
9. Dr Sławomir Kotylak, Uniwersytet Zielonogórski
10. Dr Lenka Kratka, Ph.D., Institute of Contemporary History, Czech Academy of Sciences
11. Dr hab. Adam Krawiec, prof. UAM, Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza w Poznaniu
12. Prof. Rob Merkin, University of Reading, UK
13. Prof. André Mineau, UQAR, Canada
14. Prof. Dr. Muafi, Universitas Islam Indonesia
15. Prof. Justyna Nawrot, Uniwersytet Gdański
16. Prof. Sönke Neitzel, University of Potsdam
17. Dr hab. Przemysław Olstowski, prof. IH PAN, Instytut Historii im. Tadeusza Manteuffla Polskiej Akademii Nauk
18. Prof. Milada Polišenská, Anglo-American University (AAU), Prague
19. Dr Jarosław Suchoples, Instytut Muzyki, Sztuki i Badań nad Kulturą, Uniwersytet w Jyväskylä, Finlandia
Reviewers of Volume 34/2021
1. Prof. Zbigniew Dalewski, Instytut Historii PAN
2. Prof. Stefan Donecker, Austrian Academy of Science
3. Prof. Anu Mai Koll, CBEES Södertörn University, Sweden
4. Dr Mateusz Nowikiewicz, Uniwersytet Wrocławski
5. Prof. Jens E. Olesen, Universität Greifswald
6. Prof. Jakub Polit, Uniwersytet Jagielloński
7. Dr Jordan Siemianowski, Uniwersytet Szczeciński
8. Prof. Rafał Siminski, Uniwersytet Szczeciński
9. Prof. Robert Skobelski, Uniwersytet Zielonogórski
10. Prof. Leszek Słupecki, Uniwersytet Rzeszowski
11. Prof. Wojciech Skóra, Akademia Pomorska w Słupsku
12. Prof. Jan Hecker-Stampehl, German Sport University Cologne
13. Prof. Ryszard Techman, Archiwum Straży Granicznej
Reviewers of Volume 33/2020
1. Prof. Zbigniw Anusik, Uniwersytet Łódzki
2. Dr Roland Dobrzeniecki-Łukasiewicz, Wyższa Szkoła Menedżerska w Warszawie
3. Dr Falk Flade Uniwersytet Europejski Viadrina
4. Prof. Maciej Franz, Uniwersytet im. A. Mickiewicza w Poznaniu
5. Prof. Norbert Kasparek, Uniwersytet Warmińsko-Mazurski w Olsztynie
6. Dr Iwona Królikowska, Uniwersytet Gdański
7. Prof. Stefan Kwiatkowski
8. Dr Mart Kuldkepp, University College London
9. Prof. Karol Łopatecki, Uniwersytet w Białymstoku
10. Prof. Leos Müller, Stockholm University
11. Prof. Michael North, Universität Greifswald
12. Prof. Jens Olesen, Universität Greifswald
13. Prof. Radosław Skrycki, Uniwersytet Szczeciński
14. Prof. Marek Wilczyński, Uniwersytet Pedagogiczny im. KEN w Krakowie
15. Prof. Miron Wolny, Uniwersytet Warmińsko-Mazurski w Olsztynie
Reviewers of Volume 32/2019
1. Prof. Radosław Gaziński, Uniwersytet Szczeciński
2. Prof. Tomasz Jurek, Uniwersytet im. A. Mickiewicza w Poznaniu
3. Prof. Norbert Kasparek, Uniwersytet Warmińsko-Mazurski w Olsztynie
4. Prof. Joachim Krüger, Universität Greifswald
5. Prof. Stefan Kwiatkowski
6. Prof. Agnieszka Malarewicz-Jakubów, Uniwersytet w Białymstoku
7. Prof. Muller, Stockholm University
8. Prof. Zdzisław Noga, Uniwersytet Pedagogiczny im. KEN w Krakowie
9. Prof. Karol Olejnik, Uniwersytet im. A. Mickiewicza w Poznaniu
10. Prof. Jens Olesen, Universität Greifswald
11. Prof. Tomasz Sondej, Wyższa Szkoła Bankowa w Poznaniu
12. Prof. Bartłomiej Toszek, Uniwersytet Szczeciński
13. Dr Iwona Windeklilde, Aalborg University Dania
14. Prof. Rościsław Żerelik, Uniwersytet Wrocławski
Reviewers of Volume 31/2018
1. Prof. Dariusz Adamczyk, Deutsches Historisches Institut, Warszawa
2. Prof. Zbigniew Anusik, Uniwersytet Łódzki
3. Prof. Oliver Auge, Christian-Albrechts Universität Kile
4. Prof. Martin Hansson, Lund University
5. Prof. Paweł Jaworski, Uiwersytet Wrocławski
6. Prof. Arnold Kłonczyński, Uniwersytet Gdański
7. Prof. Mathias Niendorf, Universität Greifswald
8. Prof. Leszek Słupecki, Uniwersytet Rzeszowski
9. Prof. Krystyna Szelągowska, Uniwersytet w Białymstoku
10. Prof. Barbara Tornquist-Plewa, Lund University
